I was very excited at the prospect of
reviewing the updated Bryston 4B SST amp when I heard one was available.
It was, after all, the Bryston 3B ST that opened the proverbial window
for me and exposed the difference an amplifier can really make in one's
system performance. Before that time, I stood firm in the "amps don't
make much of a difference" camp. I cannot recall the exact circumstances
in which I came to own the 3B ST, I suspect, however, that I had come
into some extra money and may have just discovered AudiogoN and realized
I could venture deeper into the world of hi-fi at a reduced expense.

At the time I had a pair of Sonus Faber
Concertos, an REL Storm subwoofer, Rega Planet CDP, and I think I was
using a Luxman receiver as a preamp. I was so bowled over by the
improvement the 3B ST did for my system I went to my local salon and
ordered a Bryston BP-25 preamp sans audition. Which is not
recommended, but in that case it worked out very well.

As is true for many "experienced"
audiophiles, we recall one system that performed so much better than
anything we have heard since (without consideration to it being true or
not). I am willing to concede that for me, it is perhaps only a romantic
memory and if it were here with me today next to my reference rig, it
would not be as wonderful as I recalled. Nonetheless, reviewing the
Bryston would give me an opportunity to at least glimpse into my audio
memory.

Not much has changed in the last 10 years
with styling at Bryston, it is still the masculine and sturdy chassis it
was when I received my 3B ST. Mine was black, but the silvered review
sample looked a bit more contemporary and the handles connoted a rugged,
tough, and solid piece of equipment. Given the unparalleled 20-year
fully transferable warranty Bryston gives with each of its amps, it's no
wonder the housing appears to be over-engineered.

This review amp is the 4B SST, rated at
300-watts or about 175 more then my 3B-ST. Furthermore, Bryston did a
bit of tuning up and reorganizing to the innards which garnered the SST
designation. If memory serves, when Bryston went to the ST designation
for its amps, it was to give credit to their electrical
engineer/designer, Stuart Taylor, who was primarily responsible for what
turned out to be a very successful and well received series of
amplifiers. What the extra "S" stands for, I can only speculate…."Super
Stuart Taylor" perhaps.

The amplifier arrived with no "burn-in" time
on it whatsoever. At first it did have a muddled or bloated upper-bass
and lower midrange, but after a week or so it was freed from such
signatures and over the next few weeks, it settled into what is its
true sonic thumb print. That being a well spoken, take no prisoners,
make no apologies solid-state amp.

All too often a solid-state amp is, for
better or worse, guilty of trying to be "tube-like" or trying to achieve
a "tube-ish midrange". Very few seem to be proud of their solid-state-ness
in their own right. Certainly, if being tube-like was the design goal of
the engineers, then perhaps "a job well done" is in order. Tubes are
generally recognized as offering a preferred silkiness to the midrange,
so it is not surprising that many solid-state engineers seek to capture
certain aspects of the tube sound, while keeping other solid-state
aspects all within the same design.

I can attest that this Bryston is all
solid-state; proud of it, and it makes no apologies for being such. I
was indoctrinated into the hobby by solid-state, having only dabbled in
tubes now and again. Yes, the midrange of most tube amps are silky
smooth, but the obsession of tubes and tube rolling is lost on me. With
amps like the Bryston 4B SST in the world, who needs tubes? (Loaded
question, I know).

After about 100 hours, I started to ease my
way into my listening position. The improvement from the out-of-the-box
sound was vast and I felt sufficient break-in had taken place. Over the
next three weeks or so I listened. I tend to "review" in nearly the same
way most people listen. I play discs that I want to hear; not ones
that do certain audiophile tricks. That's not to say I don't drop in
some of key, long term reference recordings that I had used long before
I started reviewing, such as Stacy Kent's The Tender Trap, 'cause
I do. But other then that, I simply listen, a lot, then take some notes,
and after two, three, or even four weeks I write.

With the Bryston, the four weeks could have
easily turned into five, six, or more before I even considered writing. I
found listening to music through the Bryston to be enjoyable and
distraction free. I consider my reference amp, the NuForce Reference 9
SE V2, to be state of the art, and when I have another amp in for review
(or any other piece of gear for that matter) there is almost always some
shortcoming or other aberration to deal with and weigh out in the
compromise game. Not so much with the Bryston, the presentation was
solid and even handed in its own solid-state way.

Perhaps one of the most astonishing
characteristics of my reference system is the black hole that sucks in
every bit of nonessential information that dares to linger between the
notes. Never, ever before have I experienced such a blackness, no matter
the volume's digital read out on the Pass Labs X.1. I have never heard
an extraneous noise, hiss, or tick. This is rarely duplicated with the
addition of some piece of review gear, especially amplifiers. With the Bryston however, it was nearly identical as with
that of the NuForce. And that is
something in and of itself. With this emptiness, nearly every other
aspect of the amplifier's performance is better for it: dynamics,
ambiance, and soundstage, to name just a few.

I recalled that when I inserted the 3B ST into my
mid-90's set up, I had to reset my subwoofer's settings as there was
much more bass information and output and it knocked the balance of the
system off and into the next room. I was very impressed and with the 4B
SST and I was anxious to hear what would happen in the nether regions. I
was not hiding the fact that I was wishing for similar results but, try
as I might, I did not seem to be able to capture the amount of bass I
knew was there, or could be, with my speaker's set-up.

It was not to be. Compared to my reference,
the NuForce edged out the Bryston on terms of bottom end punch and
growl. This is not much of a knock against the Bryston though, because,
the bass slam on the NuForce is truly remarkable. When I say the Bryston
was "edged" out what I am really saying is that in this setting, the
Bryston's bass performance was outstanding in both depth and punch, it
just wasn't as good as the Nuforce's. With that said, the
Bryston's output was in near perfect balance within this spectrum and
was tuneful to boot.

If I recall anything clearly from my 3B ST
experience it's that with the Kimber Cable Silver Streaks interconnects
I had at the time the upper ranges were a bit screechy and even became
fatiguing at times. I did enjoy the high pitched, yet authentic, sound
of Ani Difranco's fingers sliding stridently along the strings of her
guitar. Back then, I was content to categorize it as desired "detail."

Fast forward to today. I still have silver
core interconnects, as well as speaker wire and power cords, however,
the engineering in the Crystal Cables Reference Connects has completely
done away with any silver sourced glare coming though the speakers.
Mated with the subject Bryston, the higher end is effortlessly and
convincingly reproduced.

If the solid-state amplifier has a common
characteristic with most of its brethren, it is arguably the way it
reproduces the midrange, and for specificity of the review, we will
agree that we are speaking of the reproduction of the female voice. So,
it's not surprising that it's considered a success when a solid-state
amp can sound much like a tube amp when reproducing the female voice, as
it is nearly universally agreed that the silky smoothness of a well
executed tube amp design is sublime. However, it is not a disaster if a
solid state amp reproduces the female voice and not have it sound
"tube-y." Case in point: the Bryston 4B SST.

There is nothing about the 4B SST's midrange
that I would call tube sounding, and when you listen to it, I suspect,
no one would think it any other than being reproduced by a solid state
amp. Now, I found the midrange, i.e. the female voice, to be every bit
as compelling and satisfying as if it were sent through a beautiful set
of tubes. Beth Orton's vocal prowess has many different characteristics;
her voice can have a decidedly romantic feel to it on one track and be
devoid of the same on the next. Regardless, I found the 4B SST to
deliver the mid-range performance as it was intended to be and with all
the various cues required to connect deeply with the music.

I must, however, give credit were credit is
due, and that is with the Crystal Cables. When I reviewed these sometime
ago I was, and still am, completely taken aback with their ability to
synergize the system's individual parts into one meaningful whole. At
the same time I do not want to take anything away from the Bryston. It
is hard to get the female voice right, especially for a solid state
amplifier. In each of the recordings that I have played over the last
month ( Dianne Reeves, Ani Difranco, Stacy Kent, Rosanne Cash, Annie
Lennox, and so many more) not once did I feel like some important piece
of the vocal pie had been cut out. The Bryston sold it; lock stock and
barrel, and all the while not sounding like a tube amplifier.

If there was anything that I really missed
in the absence of my reference, I would have to say it was dynamics.
This is because I longed for what I had become accustomed to. The
Bryston's dynamics were present and fairly convincing. The amp was able
to deliver the musical swings and all the dramatic episodes that were
asked of it, but it fell short of what I would have expected given the
other performance parameters of the amp. Case in point, this amp could
be pushed like no other. The X.1's volume knob digitally reads out from
1 to 31 and there are times where I am comfortable listening at 25. The
4B SST didn't show even the slightest hint of strain or distortion. It
was absolutely mind-boggling how enjoyable the listening session was at
both a reasonable 13 and an outrageous 25 on the volume knob. I would
have thought that this Herculean display of control would translate into
the world of dynamics, micro and macro, and it did to an extent. It
really only fell short given my expectations and relevant comparisons.
In the end, this issue could best be categorized as a quibble.

Soundstage was full and wide. My set up has
the speakers just a bit further away from my listening position than I
would really prefer. However, in the larger scheme of things, I have to
live with them were they are. The only downside, that I have noticed, is
when evaluating the system's soundstage, and more specifically the focus
of the soundstage, I am handicapped and have to stop short of full
praise. I will say that what is there, in terms the soundstage, was
every bit as good as my reference.

It has been some time since I have reviewed
a solid-state amp, much less one of this price and power rating.
Nonetheless, I think a comparison to the NuForce Ref 9 SE V2 is
warranted. I have seen several postings on the various forums in which
folks are asking for comparisons of the NuForce to more popular amps,
all in the name of getting a handle on just how good the NuForce amps
are in the world of high end audio. So, let me make some comparisons. I
must say that while my Ref 9 SE V2 is one fine amplifier it was not
until the V2 board was developed and circulated that I was convinced of
this.

Now, where does that leave the Bryston? In
very good company. For the V2's wonderfully proportioned and smooth mid
range, it is extremely close between the two of them. As mentioned
above, the bass of the V2 has a touch more slam, depth, and overall
tunefulness. The Bryston is every bit as good, there is just less of it.
In the end, it is the dynamics of the V2 where the two amps diverge. I
have to admit that I have never pushed the V2 to 25 before and I suspect
it has been for good reason. Regardless, it is the dynamic nuances that
win the day for the V2 as it can explode when it needs to and swing with
the breeze when it wants to. Not that the Bryston is any slouch, but
between the two, the tip of the hat goes to the V2.

The NuForce Ref 9 SE V2 is $5500, compared
to $4095 for the Bryston, however, their respective performance would
suggest they are priced much closer together and that both cost much
more then they actually do. Each are fine amplifiers, each I could live
with and enjoy. I suspect I will miss the unabashed control of the
Bryston which allowed it to be pushed while filling my whole house, if
not the whole neighborhood, with high quality and wonderfully reproduced
music. Alas, I heard and fell for the NuForces some time ago and, truth
be told I have no intention of letting them go. As they share so much of
the sonic signature, I recommend that you audition the Bryston and if
you end up purchasing it, be confident that you too will be happy for a
long time to come. John Brazier